Thread Tools

In 2007, Belichick admitted to years of what seemed to everyone except him as cheating. If New England returns to the Super Bowl, the sports world might have to relive Spygate -- including the unresolved questions of why Belichick wouldn't come clean until forced, and why he never really apologized. If the Patriots win this year's Super Bowl, people might wonder if they are cheating still. Probably not, but considering the elaborate, systematic nature of their previous clandestine efforts, this can't be ruled out. Many football enthusiasts, including in the league front office, might not mind if the Patriots are knocked off early in the playoffs, and Spygate: The Sequel doesn't happen.

Very preditable, this guy Easterbrook hates Belechick not the Patriots. To bad too, it was a great read up to the hatred for Belechick.

Click to expand...

Did B.B. sleep with your wife or something? Get over it Gregg.

Click to expand...

how does this guy even have a job? spygate are you kidding me? he sounds no better than a troll on a message board

Click to expand...

As I am reading this article I am thinking, he is being way to complimentary of the patriots. When is he going to mention spygate. oh wait there it is!!!! If anything Mr. Easterbrook you are predictable.

Click to expand...

So once again Spygate is brought up, of course, why wouldn't it be with this guy. But I thought it contradictory how he kept comparing the 2007 Pats to this squad when clearly the 2007 team wasn't cheating anymore because they were just busted. Can everyone at least agree on that? That after the Jets ratted them out they stopped taping and went on to have the best regular season in NFL history? I mean, could you even fathom that they'd continue right after being caught, fined, and basically everyone saying their previous wins were tainted? No way! Why does this always get overlooked? So annoying. And now Easterbrook is speculating that they are doing it again because we're playing like the team in 07 that clearly wasn't "cheating" anymore and that it's all going to come out if we make it to the super bowl? What?!?! What planet is this guy from anyways?
It's funny too, as I was reading this I was like "hmmm, seems like this guy is finally over his hatred for the Pats". Ops

Indeed. Thanks, OP, for linking me to a sh!t article that I never wanted to read in the first place. I'm not even going to click the link to line Easterbrook's pockets. Once again, if you want these people to go away, and I'm going to put this in all caps so maybe someone might get it someday: THEN DON'T ******* READ HIM.

He certainly did apologize. It is just the haters who decided it didn't really happen.

"Although it remains a league matter, I want to apologize to everyone who has been affected, most of all ownership, staff and players," Belichick said. "Following the league's decision, I will have further comment."

New England Patriots owner Robert Kraft and coach Bill Belichick made the rounds on Tuesday, apologizing for and explaining Spygate.

In an emotional speech before NFL owners, Kraft and coach Belichick apologized for the franchise's involvement in the scandal.

With apparent tension in the meeting room, Kraft asked for time to speak and apologized for Spygate in which a videographer was caught taping signals of Jets defensive coaches. After an investigation, the Patriots lost a first-round draft choice and $250,000 and Belichick was fined $500,000.

Kraft spoke of the values of the partnership with the league and how disappointed he was that his team brought negative attention to the league. Colts coach Tony Dungy described the speech as heartfelt and excellent, saying "I appreciated what he had to say."

Others who listened believed Kraft was speaking from the heart. Once Kraft was done talking, the entire room broke into applause.
Belichick also requested time to speak. As he told reporters earlier in the day, he accepted the punishment and thought that action showed no gray area in regard to the rules involving spying. Since the season opener against the Jets, Belichick said he has changed the entire operation and is now moving forward with no misunderstanding.

According to sources, many owners felt Spygate was a pink elephant in the room that needed to be addressed before the owners could continue. Commissioner Roger Goodell took the lead by giving the floor to Kraft and letting him speak.

"I'm happy they did it," Broncos owner Pat Bowlen said. "I don't know they had to do it. But it was good to hear from them. We're all trying to move on from this thing. What was said will stay in the room, but it was good."

Speaking during the AFC coaches breakfast at the NFL meetings earlier in the day, Belichick insisted there are no new revelations to come about Spygate.

"I think they've addressed everything they possibly can address," the coach said Tuesday.

Belichick said he was interviewed again after the Super Bowl about allegations that former team employee Matt Walsh had information about illegal taping. That information presumably included the process of taping a walkthrough by the St. Louis Rams on the day before the 2002 Super Bowl, a game the Patriots won.

In February, Belichick and Patriots vice president of player personnel Scott Pioli issued a broad denial to a report on The Boston Globe's Web site regarding suggestions by a former employee that their team taped the walkthrough.

"I've addressed so many questions so many times from so many people I don't know what else the league could ask," Belichick said.

...."What I should have done ... I should have called the league and asked for a clarification," he said. "That was my mistake."
He said that in one respect, Spygate did the Patriots a favor.

"We've taken it as a positive and reorganized our operations to make sure a situation like this never comes up again," he said. "Our operation is more efficient, more streamlined. Look at the results of this season. That would confirm it."

Elaborate , systematic , clandestine operations. Pointing a camera at someone 35 yards away from you in broad daylight. Clandestine?? Thank God he doesn't work for the CIA. You could just walk up and down the street and get all of the information you need. Who needs spies?

It's funny, I was reading that column earlier today - I saw Easterbrook's name and assumed it was going to be another hatchet job on the Pats - and was shocked to see it so complimentary to the Patriots. I got busy with something else and didn't finish reading it; I didn't realize till now he included that last paragraph.

Re-reading it now, its about 98% very complimentary of the Patriots. And as much as it pains me to say this, Easterbrook does have one valid point in that last paragraph: if the Patriots go to the Super Bowl, SG is going to be brought up again, over and over during the time between the AFCCG and the Super Bowl. He is also probably correct when he says that there are some, even in the NFL front office, who would prefer the Pats not go to the Super Bowl simply to avoid the subject of SG being brought up.

On the other hand, Easterbrook did slyly interject some major speculation masked as fact in that last paragraph, for which he should be called out, when he say if "the Patriots win this year's Super Bowl, people might wonder if they are cheating still. Probably not, but considering the elaborate, systematic nature of their previous clandestine efforts, this can't be ruled out."

It was a guy on the sideline with a camera; that's neither elaborate nor is it clandestine.

I have a feeling the more the Pats keep winning, the more writers like those we have seen this past week or so (King, Easterbrook, Sando) are going to dust off their old SG stories on a regular basis.

I suppose that it's a good sign to have people like Easterdoof writing about the Pats again - everyone likes to take down the favorite, and the Pats are back on top again. Doesn't it almost feel refreshing?

This clown lost me as a reader in 2007. He's just an arrogant clod with opinions and little to offer in terms of insight on the sport. Dr. Z with SI is just as educated but actually knows the history of the game of football and doesn't come off as aloof.

It's a shame the world couldn't trade Easterbrook's presence for Z's health and writing ability. Then the football gods would smile, as Easterbrook is so fond of stating.

It's funny, I was reading that column earlier today - I saw Easterbrook's name and assumed it was going to be another hatchet job on the Pats - and was shocked to see it so complimentary to the Patriots. I got busy with something else and didn't finish reading it; I didn't realize till now he included that last paragraph.

Re-reading it now, its about 98% very complimentary of the Patriots. And as much as it pains me to say this, Easterbrook does have one valid point in that last paragraph: if the Patriots go to the Super Bowl, SG is going to be brought up again, over and over during the time between the AFCCG and the Super Bowl. He is also probably correct when he says that there are some, even in the NFL front office, who would prefer the Pats not go to the Super Bowl simply to avoid the subject of SG being brought up.

On the other hand, Easterbrook did slyly interject some major speculation masked as fact in that last paragraph, for which he should be called out, when he say if "the Patriots win this year's Super Bowl, people might wonder if they are cheating still. Probably not, but considering the elaborate, systematic nature of their previous clandestine efforts, this can't be ruled out."

It was a guy on the sideline with a camera; that's neither elaborate nor is it clandestine.

I have a feeling the more the Pats keep winning, the more writers like those we have seen this past week or so (King, Easterbrook, Sando) are going to dust off their old SG stories on a regular basis.

Click to expand...

Sadly, you're correct. It comes with the territory for us now, unfortunately. He really uses some elaborate language to create suspicion, without really being accusatory. I'll give him this - he's a slick wordsmith. But, he has such an agenda in regard to BB that his semi-accusations/suggestions are transparent to anyone familiar with the history here. As a self-styled crusader for truth, justice and the American way, Gregg fails miserably here on one critical point: if you make accusations, particularly serious ones, you'd better damn well have solid proof and cite it in detail. He didn't, because he can't.

On sunday I had the raiders game on and when Cable challenged the fumble/int there was someone in a raiders jacket with a large video camera so i guess everyone is still doing it and just not getting caught wish i had a dvr to show it.